Problem Solution: Global Communications

Problem Solution: Global Communications

Many companies believe to remain competitive they must match the same working conditions as their lower cost competitors. Instead of investing in their employees most companies believe outsourcing and offshore solutions are their only options. However, it has been proven that companies that adopt positive workplace practices experience positive results for both their companies and employees (O'Toole & Lawler, III, 2006). Faced with decreasing market share, Global Communications (GC) followed the above strategy and announced a cost-cutting plan that includes layoffs and outsourcing of technical support positions to offshore call centers. GC believes this is their best option to gain market share and profitability.

Due to the lack of open communication, the GC senior leadership team did not have clear goals when developing the strategic plan. When a corporation is committed to open communication at every level guessing is eliminated. Corporate goals and plans are clear, focused and consistent (Woods, 1994). This investigation will begin by creating a problem statement for GC's current situation. After the completion of a gap analysis and benchmarking alternative solutions will be developed. After analyzing the alternative solution an optimal solution will be identified to help GC reach their end state vision. Once the optimal solution is identified and a risk assessment is completed an implementation plan will be developed. The plan will include a timeline, deliverables and state who has responsibility for the deliverables. Measurable results will help determine if the solution achieved any success.

Before and after the strategic plan announcement, several unforeseen stakeholder issues and conflicts surfaced. Part of the responsibilities of the leadership team is implementing the new strategic plan and to develop the tools to know if the objectives are being met. "Developing communication and information systems enable management to know if the decision alternative is meeting its planned objectives" (Gomez-Mejia & Balkin, 2002, chap. 9).

Situation Analysis

Issue and Opportunity Identification

GC stock has experienced over a 50% depreciation over the last three years. The depreciation is the result of Wall Street's weakening confidence in the telecommunications industry and competition from cable companies entering the industry. Based purely on the diminishing value of GC stock, the senior leadership team developed a strategic plan to regain market share and improve profitability. The board has approved the strategic plan and the leadership team is preparing implementation. Because of poor communications with stakeholders, such as the Technologies Workers Union (TWU) and employees, GC is receiving poor publicity. They have been publicly criticized because their new strategic plan does not fall in line with their philosophy; Our Edge Is People.

Table 1 shows the current issues facing GC and possible opportunities to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future. The first issue is the lack of an effective communication policy between GC, TWU, and employees. The TWU heard of the strategic plan, which included outsourcing, through the grapevine which eroded any trust TWU had in GC. The GC leadership team was scrabbling to communicate the strategic plan to employees before the news traveled through the grapevine. GC desire to maintain a positive image is in danger. "Grapevine information is sometimes so distorted that it escalates rather than reduce employee anxiety" (McShane & Von Glinow, 2004, chap. 11).

The second issue is that the GC senior leadership team did not take in account the complete ramifications to all employees. GC does not have a documented communication plan to inform employees of changes before they are heard through the grapevine. "Communication is also a key ingredient in employee satisfaction and loyalty" (McShane & Von Glinow, 2004, chap. 11). GC can use this as an opportunity to create an organizational policy to promote a strong internal communication policy.

Third, GC's negotiating team did not clearly identify TWU's goals during labor contract negotiations which created conflict between the union and GC. Contract negotiations were recently completed between GC and TWU, which resulted in a 20% reduction of employee benefits and training. TWU agreed to these reductions, understanding GC is under financial pressures, in an effort to help. Upon hearing the strategic plan the union became extremely upset and believes that GC is trying to manipulate the recent contract agreement. The quality of information in negotiations is a key factor in their success. Hiding facts will destroy trust, which is vital in win-win negotiations (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2004, chap. 14). GC has an opportunity to create a communication plan that allows dissemination of quality information to the TWU to allow win-win negotiations.

The fourth and final issue is managing employee layoffs. GC does not have organizational policies in place to help employees adjust to unemployment and find new employment. Affected GC employees are not aware of available alternatives. The day before the announcement of the new strategic plan, the senior leadership team was trying to create a communications plan. Even the senior leadership team did not know what alternatives they were going to offer to employees. "Downsizings can be implemented in thoughtful, careful ways which decrease the numbers of employees who have to be terminated while increasing the probabilities that the workers themselves and their communities can recover more quickly from the layoffs" (Feldman & Leana, 1994, p. 258). One final opportunity is to create a policy to effective manage workforce reductions.

Stakeholder Perspectives/Ethical Dilemmas

Table 2 is a snapshot of the stakeholders along with their interests, rights and values. Below is a discussion of stakeholder conflicting interests and rights. Ethical dilemmas will also be identified.

GC's Board of Directors and stockholders primary focus is profitability and maximizing share value. Their concern is not for the employees but market share and cost-costing initiatives to improve the value of their investment. The senior leadership team's responsibility to shareholders is in direct conflict with their social responsibility for the employees and communities. They must carefully weigh the pros and cons of profitability versus social responsibility.

One view is the leadership team is only responsible to the stockholders. They should not exercise social responsibility